Tag Archives: Ron Paul

“This would be a good time to take your medicine and remain silent about anything i do or say”

That is the message I received from Al Gerhart this morning.

Although I loath to have to write about this on my personal blog, I feel I have no choice because I have realized that some of my friends that have not had to spend time at ground zero with Al Gerhart, do not know the extent of his abusiveness towards other grassroots activists and this is why I have chosen to make my remarks on the situation both clear and public, so that they will know.

The grassroots activists in Oklahoma has a poison in their midst. The poison is Al Gerhart of the Sooner Tea Party.

I do not want to make a public logbook of all each and every harm caused by the man so you can take my words of caution for what you believe they are worth and you are welcome to contact me privately if you have any questions.

I tolerated Gerhart far longer than I should have. It was some months ago when I knew for certain that he invariably destroys nearly everything he touches and that there is no tolerating of him. At that point I pointedly and publicly severed ties. But that did not free me from the damage caused by Gerhart. Without fail people and projects that I love have crossed paths with the man since causing damage and heartache to all touched by him. He also will not refrain from exercising a vendetta against any and all that he feels have crossed him in some way making my first choice of a peaceful parting of ways impossible.

I have few gifts and many faults but one of those gifts is the ability to work with and find common ground with just about anyone. I truly like people, all kinds of people, and that fact is evident in all that I do.

When Al Gerhart came on the activism scene in 2009, I thought he was ‘different’. And he was. To his credit, he is one of the hardest workers I have ever known. Nothing deters him from his goals. He doesn’t scare easily and never backs down. He is also pretty smart. Adjusting to Al Gerhart was a tough challenge but since he was obviously here to stay and slap in the middle of most things I was working on, I accepted him the same way I do any activist. To each his own! Let’s face it, there aren’t enough of us that are paying attention to our government and even less that are willing to speak up and work hard to correct the problems we see. Al’s greatest fault is the fact that he is built to be a hammer and everything and everyone looks like a nail to him. He cannot discern between freind or foe and nothing and no one is sacred to him. And he has proven time and again, we are all fair game.

Many people have found themselves discomforted with Al’s tactics when it comes to legislators and officials. We have justified it to ourselves by thinking that they choose to take office and harsh comments from the public goes with the territory. Also, with the level of frustration we have feeling ignored and inconsequential in matters of our governance, we chose to condone Al’s behavior towards these public officials even though in many of our minds, he went too far for our tastes.

Then we come to a problem that hits a little closer to home and that is the level of abuse heaped upon ordinary grassroots activists that displease ‘Al the Terrible’ in some manner. Now, Al justifies this type of behavior by saying that “We must also hold our conservative group leaders accountable.” By ‘accountable’ he means dishing out brutal punishment to these people that is all out of proportion to any ‘crime’. Now mind you, I am talking about people like you who are not paid and don’t get anything out of their work but personal satisfaction. These are people that are concerned about the antics of government and are endeavoring in some way to change things for the better. Nothing more, nothing less but in the mind of Al Gerhart, these people’s perceived transgressions are worthy of what amounts to public humiliation.

Out of respect, I am not going to name these respected activists that Al Gerhart has maligned.. If you read this blog or have even a superficial level of involvement in grassroots conservative politics-you know them and you respect them. If you read the Sooner Tea Party newsletter, you have read it.

An example punishment meted out to these activists that far exceeds any ‘crime’ there is the instance of a Christian Pastor and well respected conservative activist who dared challenge Al Gerhart. He is punished by depicting him, both graphically and textually, as a victim of homosexual rape.

For the average activist transgressor, they are treated to paragraph after paragraph of accusations of being sniveling cowards and liars and fools while Gerhart spins his story in such a way that he always come out the hero.

For the handicapped transgressor, Al has no problem poking fun at their physical condition.

Even when he takes up the cause of good men, he does so by filthy means that ends up staining the good man’s reputation.

I am presently the target of Al Gerhart. In my case I have punished for my independent actions that displeased Al Gerhart and this, in Gerhart’s twisted mind, warrants me a public shaming via his weekly newsrag.

Most recently, he is upset with me because his public public taunting of myself and others I care about have earned him the threat of a single blow to his delicate snotlocker should I ever be presented the opportunity of doing so. Maybe I was wrong to say such a thing but I was at a loss for how to respond rationally to an irrational person. For this insult to the dignity of the great and powerful Al, I get a write up as being not only a coward but a horridly obese woman and a “Sasquatch” in his weekly newsletter. (If you want to read his pathetic attempt to humiliate me into silence, you can do so here. The diatribe is towards the bottom under “A Reader Responds”) If Al was the psychological mastermind that he thinks he is, he would have known that it is my brains and not my butt that I prize so much and that I happen to think my butt is fine and his words would do nothing to change that fact.

In other writings, I have been called profane names and have been misrepresented in a number of ways but he has done far worse to others. This is the virtual equivalent of a tar and feathering.

This morning I received more warnings from Mr. Gerhart who is apparently feeling the effects of his own boorish behavior in the form of good people withdrawing their support of him. He sent me a text message asking me if I have unfiled tax returns and warning that;

“This would be a good time to take your medicine and remain silent about anything i do or say”

I told him I would not be quiet and that I am not afraid of him.

to which he responded;

“Choose your path wisely. I’ve treated you gently so far but that can change if need be. I meant the good things i wrote about your work, it would be a shame if you didn’t learn your lesson”

My two word response to his threat?

“Bite it”

Over the years since I have known Al, I have witnessed his reaction to what he sees as the most serious threat of all, the threat of someone getting between him and the drug that he is addicted to; Power and Control. That means I am surely in for it because I fully intend to challenge his power and control when it come to my life and the people I care about.

I know from his past behavior that he will spend hours and hours working on a blistering write up filled with lies, half truths and garden variety spin meant to exalt himself and and pound his target into submission.

A good example is a recent 23,000 word screed authored by Al Gerhart and posted to a popular Ron Paul message board that literally left hapless forum reader breathless at the sheer volume of words created by this maniac. Most did not read the novel but it did earn a top spot as the most lengthy posts ever written on that site.

Yes, I am certainly in for it aren’t I? But I will not be silent about the things he does and says and I will not take my medicine. I do not fear of him, my Father has my back and at the end of the day, Al Gerhart can take it up with him.

Furthermore, I will take this opportunity to entreat upon the conscious of those who continue to support this man either by subscribing to his venomous newsletter or by their silence in the face of his vile attacks against people they may not know to do the right thing and deprive him of oxygen.

I have often said when people thank me for my work that their words are my payday. Al is no different. The work he does pays only in his personal satisfaction. Your subscription to his newsletter gives him great joy. In fact, he can see from the newsletter client he uses, when each person opens it, how long they spend reading it and even who they forward it to. He treasures these logs of your attention like a miser counting his money. He pores over them often as evidence that he matters, that he has influence and power.

Now let me say that Al has provided some value to his readers in the form of good information and exposing wrongdoing. I wish he would keep to that. At the same time, he has also done his readers a disservice by letting personal vendettas interfere with the facts so that it is hard to trust what he writes. I realized the last time I tried to give him the facts on his faulty reporting and he rejected it, that he cares nothing for the truth and I could not trust his information and therefor it was of little value.

I have already deprived Mr. Gerhart his ‘payday’ a while back by unsubscribing from his venom filled newsletter. I hope others will search their conscious too and do exactly what Gerhart repeatedly reminds his readers to do, hold him accountable.

Last legislative session, Rep. Charles Key offered an Amendment to the legislative rules (dubbed the “Open Government Rule”) which provided that all of our elected representatives would get a hearing on a bill if requested. The amendment failed after leadership left the vote open for a very long time so that they could “whip” recalcitrant house members into switching their Yay votes to Nay votes. The measure thus failed

The problem: Bills are assigned to committees whose chairmen exercise dictatorial control over whether a bill gets a fair hearing. Without discussion or vote, chairmen can arbitrarily kill any legislation they choose.

If a legislator is unable to get his or her bill heard, then representative government is essentially dead. Many good bills never get a fair hearing and recorded vote because the committee chairman chooses not to hear them. Legislators are able to avoid taking a public position on difficult issues. The people are the losers.

The solution is the Open Government Rule: The House and Senate need to change their rules to assure that every bill that a legislator wants heard gets a fair hearing in committee and recorded vote. And every bill that passes committee gets a fair hearing and recorded vote on the floor.

This rule change will assure that the people, through their representatives, get a fair hearing for their ideas. Just as important, the people will be able to hold their representatives accountable. No longer will politicians be able to say one thing while doing something else.

One More Chance – The Discharge Petition

House rules allow for discharge petitions as a means to get a bill brought out of a committee for a vote on the House floor. We need the signatures of 66 House members to get HR 1004 (read HR1004) discharged from committee and on the House floor for a vote.

Right now we have 45 signatures but we need a minimum of 66 signatures. That means we need 21 more signatures in order to get HR 1004 to the floor for a vote.

Your help is needed!

On Wednesday March 7, 2012, grassroots activists from across Oklahoma interested in ensuring transparent and representative government throughout the entire legislative process will meet for a petition drive for HR 1004 at the Oklahoma State Capitol at 9 am.

We will gather on the first floor rotunda and then go door to door giving our Red List legislators an opportunity to sign the discharge petition. The Media will be present to cover this effort so make sure you look sharp!

Here are the score cards.

he names of legislators in GREEN have already signed the petition. Thank these legislators!

The names of legislators in RED have not yet signed the petition. These are the ones we will be asking for their signature on Wednesday March 7th

If you do not know who your representative is, click here and see which House district you live in. Then here to find the corresponding House member.

If you have any questions, comments or suggestions, please contact me at axxiomforliberty@gmail.com

OKLAHOMA CITY – The large parking lot, just south of the Oklahoma State Capitol, quickly filled up with vehicles a couple of hours before Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul even showed up for his 1 p.m. campaign rally and speech.

Many vehicles sported signs and bumper stickers supporting Ron Paul or liberty-related messages. The same could said of the folks in the crowd and the signs they held. This was an informed, excited bunch of people who were clearly concerned about the direction the country had been taking in recent years, with bank bailouts, endless wars, attacks on civil liberties and a tanking economy.

Lukus Collins, a Republican and Ron Paul activist with the grassroots Ron Paul OK organization said he was simply excited to see so many people come out to hear Ron Paul’s message of liberty and small government.

“That’s the goal,” Collins said. “Get people plugged into the effort.”

“We are excited to welcome yet another Presidential candidate to the Reddest State in the Country! If you can win Oklahoma, you can win the conservative vote nationwide. We welcome our Republican candidates to Oklahoma over the coming weeks as they compete to win our “Reddest State” primary.”

As you already know, in order for any candidate to become president, he must win the GOP nomination first. What you might not know is that it is the delegates, not ordinary voters, who will be voting to pick the GOP nominee. This is where the grassroots activists passion and mettle can make all the difference.

Yesterday I was given the opportunity to explain the importance of the delegate process to other Ron Paul supporters on Inforwars Nightly News with Aaron Dykes. You can access that video here

The Race for Nominee is Not Over… It’s Barely Started!

Oklahoma Precinct Meetings have not even taken place, yet the battle for Oklahoma’s votes for the Republican nomination for President are already in contention. While much focus has been placed on the actual “voting” for President, sources inside the Oklahoma Republican Party have confirmed that Super Tuesday is not where the battle is being fought.

New rules adopted by the Oklahoma Republican Party state that while Delegates to the National Convention must vote in accordance with the mathematical split will of the Oklahoma Electorate, they are only required to do so through the second round of balloting. On the third ballot, delegates are free to vote for the nominee of their choice.

This, added to the fact that many states changed their rules to similar formats like Oklahoma means that if no candidate has the required 1,144 delegate votes at the time of the convention, then it will be the delegates and NOT the voters who actually select the nominee for President.

While the press seems to be determined to proclaim that Mitt Romney is the de facto nominee for winning two states, the fact is that the proportional delegate counts from New Hampshire and Iowa makes the race extremely close. Romney leads with 14 delegates, Paul has 10 delegates, Rick Santorum has 8 delegates, Huntsman, Gingrich, and Perry each have two delegates.

This has led some within the Republican Party to begin shaping the delegate pool to insure that they have people on board to “play ball.” There are even reports that the recruitment of delegates is at the exclusion of one candidate. One Republican Party insider even stated that “we must find delegates who will stop Ron Paul.”

I about blew a gasket listening to Newt Gingrich explain back in November at a CNN National Security GOP Presidential Dabate that there is divide between criminal law and law used against terrorism. There is not and I know this from reading hundreds of law enforcement, Homeland Security, FBI and legal documents. The fact that there is no separation is plainly stated again and again since 9 11. But Ben Swann from WXIX explains the truth of the matter far better than I ever could.

Mr. Speaker, today I introduce legislation to protect Americans from physical and emotional abuse by federal Transportation Security Administration employees conducting screenings at the nation’s airports. We have seen the videos of terrified children being grabbed and probed by airport screeners. We have read the stories of Americans being subjected to humiliating body imaging machines and/or forced to have the most intimate parts of their bodies poked and fondled. We do not know the potentially harmful effects of the radiation emitted by the new millimeter wave machines.

In one recent well-publicized case, a TSA official is recorded during an attempted body search saying, “By buying your ticket you gave up a lot of rights.” I strongly disagree and am sure I am not alone in believing that we Americans should never give up our rights in order to travel. As our Declaration of Independence states, our rights are inalienable. This TSA version of our rights looks more like the “rights” granted in the old Soviet Constitutions, where freedoms were granted to Soviet citizens — right up to the moment the state decided to remove those freedoms.

The incident of the so-called “underwear bomber” last Christmas is given as justification for the billions of dollars the federal government is spending on the new full-body imaging machines, but a Government Accountability Office study earlier this year concluded that had these scanners been in use they may not have detected the explosive material that was allegedly brought onto the airplane. Additionally, there have been recent press reports calling into question the accuracy and adequacy of these potentially dangerous machines.

My legislation is simple. It establishes that airport security screeners are not immune from any US law regarding physical contact with another person, making images of another person, or causing physical harm through the use of radiation-emitting machinery on another person. It means they are subject to the same laws as the rest of us.

Imagine if the political elites in our country were forced to endure the same conditions at the airport as business travelers, families, senior citizens, and the rest of us. Perhaps this problem could be quickly resolved if every cabinet secretary, every member of Congress, and every department head in the Obama administration were forced to submit to the same degrading screening process as the people who pay their salaries.

I warned at the time of the creation of the TSA that an unaccountable government entity in control of airport security would provide neither security nor defend our basic freedom to travel. Yet the vast majority of both Republicans and Democrats then in Congress willingly voted to create another unaccountable, bullying agency– in a simple-minded and unprincipled attempt to appease public passion in the wake of 9-11. Sadly, as we see with the steady TSA encroachment on our freedom and dignity, my fears in 2001 were justified.

The solution to the need for security at US airports is not a government bureaucracy. The solution is to allow the private sector, preferably the airlines themselves, to provide for the security of their property. As a recent article in Forbes magazine eloquently stated, “The airlines have enormous sums of money riding on passenger safety, and the notion that a government bureaucracy has better incentives to provide safe travels than airlines with billions of dollars worth of capital and goodwill on the line strains credibility.” In the meantime, I hope we can pass this legislation and protect Americans from harm and humiliation when they choose to travel.

Bye Bye Birdie!

JAIL BIRD

Former Florida Republican Party Chair Jim Greer was arrested today on charges of grand theft and money laundering.

Governor Charlie Crist, then a Republican, appointed Greer as head of the state’s Republican Party upon election as governor in 2006. Greer was committed to alienating libertarians and conservatives from the party to favor the moderate (read: Democrat) wing of the party.

Ex-Florida GOP chairman Jim Greer indicted on six felony counts

By Matt DeLong

Jim Greer, former head of the Florida Republican Party, was arrested Wednesday morning at his home near Orlando, law enforcement officials said. The Orlando Sun-Sentinel reports that at a press conference Wednesday, statewide prosecutor William Shepherd said that “a statewide grand jury indicted Greer on six felony charges: organized scheme to defraud, money laundering, and four counts of grand theft.”

Back in January..

Greer Announces Resignation As Florida GOP Chair — And Slams Right-Wing Critics On His Way Out

Jan 5, 2010

On a conference call with reporters just now, Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer officially announced his resignation, effective on February 20. He took the opportunity to tear into his right-wing critics for wanting a smaller party and accused them of pulling apart the GOP itself in order to take him out.

Greer is an ally of Gov. Charlie Crist, a relative GOP moderate who is being vigorously challenged in this year’s Senate primary by the more conservative former state House Speaker Marco Rubio. Supporters of Rubio had been accusing Greer of mismanaging party funds and of being biased in Crist’s favor, all of which Greer has strongly denied. In his resignation, Greer said he could no longer put the party through this divisive process — but he clearly didn’t mind taking some parting shots on the way out.

“As you know, there is a great debate in our party on the direction, moderates vs. conservatives, whether we should have a big tent or a small tent,” said Greer. “And while I have made it my utmost concern to try and keep those arguments and discontents out of the Republican Party of Florida, over the last six months there has been a very vocal group within our party that has become very active in seeking an effort to oust me as chairman. They have distorted facts, they have talked about misspending of money, when the facts have been shown over and over and over that that’s not true. They have talked about my support of Gov. Crist for the U.S. Senate race. They have, as they say, thrown everything up against the wall as they possibly can, to either embarrass me or embarrass the Republican Party of Florida.”

Birds of A feather…

Sept 4, 2009

Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer and the state party Grievance Committee notified a number of party members, many of them holding elective office, that they were effectively purged from the party and had been removed from their offices and would be ineligible to hold any other party positions for periods ranging from two to four years. The targets of this purge are mostly members of the Florida chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus, a group which seeks to return the party to its core beliefs of individual liberty, limited government, and free markets.Read More

Florida GOP Chairman Greer is known for his draconian techniques to force his way with rank and file Republicans. This man consistently forces more and more Socialist Republican candidates on to Florida Republicans and expects us to accept these individuals without debate.

Greer needs to resign from his position and take up Chairmanship in a party that better embraces his point of view, perhaps the local Marxist or Socialist parties would suffice.

In addition to RLC member Will Pitts being reprimanded, lifelong Republican and RLC activist Nick Egoroff of Orlando has been expelled for four years. Additionally, Northeast Florida RLC Chairman John Stevens — himself a Republican Committeeman for his precinct — is ineligible to serve in any RPOF position until August 31, 2013.

July 15, 2009

In an ever-widening party purge led by current Republican Party of Florida Chairman Jim Greer, more GOP leaders have received “grievances” — the initial step toward total removal from the Republican Party.

Greer, under fire by over a dozen county Republican Executive Committees for trying to force endorsements of Charlie Crist for Senate and Bill McCollum for Governor has now moved against more Republican Executive Committee members.

The latest round of party purge activity centers on two Orange County Republican leaders; Ax the Tax Chairman Doug Guetzloe and Republican Liberty Caucus organizer Nick Egoroff. Both men co-Chair the Draft Paula Dockery for Governor grassroots movement that has taken the state by storm. They are being “fast-tracked” for removal at a party meeting to be held next Friday, July 24 at the Gaylord Palms Hotel at 2:00 pm.

“It is unfortunate the DCRP has chosen this destructive and divisive path booting members for standing up for principle and the Constitution.

It should be noted that I have broken no bylaws (even Chairman Starnes has admitted this) and this was a personal vindictive move by some in the DCRP and the TNGOP to remove me because they did not want their fellow Republicans such as Rep Zigzag Zach Wamp, Mayor “Ban’em” Bill Haslam, Senator “Large Government” Lamar Alexander, and Senator “Bailout Bob” Corker held accountable.

Every effort was made by myself to reach a mutual understanding, however Chairman Starnes refused to work with me in the closed door session. This Soviet style purge will result in the further alienation of the grassroots activists not only in Nashville but across the country as it is becoming more and more apparent that the GOP is a Party of exclusion.”

Since September 11, 2001, it’s been clear that terrorists who hate America will exploit our weaknesses in order to destroy us. This week, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg exploited Americans’ fear of terrorism to push their latest anti-gun proposal, and in doing so showed that they’re willing to destroy other parts of the Constitution, to choke its Second Amendment.

On Tuesday, as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Lieberman held a hearing to give Lautenberg and King the opportunity to promote their bills S.1317 and H.R.2159, to prohibit the possession of firearms by people on the FBI’s “terrorist watchlist,” and Lautenberg’s S. 2820, to maintain records of approved instant background check transactions for a minimum of 180 days. The watchlist bills further propose that a person seeking relief in court from these new restrictions would be prevented from examining and challenging “evidence” against him, and that the judge deciding whether the person had been watchlisted for good reason be limited to summaries and redacted versions of such “evidence.”

Today’s hearing examines two bills, S.1317 “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009″ and S.2820, “Preserving Records of Terrorists & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009″ (“PROTECT Act of 2009″). In reality, these two bills should be re-named the “Gun Owners Are Probably Terrorists Act,” and the “National Firearm Registry Act,” respectively. Collectively these bills strip citizens of their enumerated Constitutional Right to Bear Arms without any meaningful due process, and create a national firearms registry. The same Constitutional Due Process provided by the 5th and 14th Amendments that prevents Congress from incarcerating a citizen based on mere suspicion also prevents Congress from revoking a citizen’s Second Amendment right to bear arms. For that and other reasons, the Liberty Coalition opposes these bills.

More importantly, today’s discussion misses the point entirely. This committee should not spend time debating whether to take away Terrorists’ guns, bombs, cell phones, cars, or other instruments of terrorism. If a person is a dangerous terrorist, then he should be thrown in jail. As a felon, convicted terrorists should not, and cannot under current law, own guns.

The Arizona State Senate is considering two bills that will turn your driver’s license into a national ID card and share your personal information with the US Department of Homeland Security.

SB1070 and HB2632 are ostensibly anti-illegal immigration bills. As such, there are good things in there, such as elimination of sanctuary cities.

However, these bills have a sneak provision in them that turns the Arizona Driver’s License into a national ID. Section 2. 11-1051, subsections F.1-3. specifically require that the state obtain prior clearance from the US Department of Homeland Security before you can obtain or renew your Driver’s License. Additionally, it requires data exchange of your domicile information.

The people of Arizona have been lied to. They were sold a system that was set up to video record their vehicle on state roads and impose an unfair tax on driving. It had nothing to do with safety, although that was a clearly stated goal. It was completely about generating revenue, under the guise of safety.

Initially, the photo traffic enforcement system on Arizona freeways and interstates was installed and deployed after the state signed a contract with Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia in 2008. The contract stated that only drivers exceeding the speed limit by 11 mph or more would be “photographed.” There was no mention of continuous capture of every car on the road with video, which is what the fixed cameras are actually doing.

The term “photo radar” is a misnomer when referring to the fixed camera system, because it is actually video that is being taken. Even if it could be argued that the public has no right to privacy on state-owned roads, the system itself is tragically flawed and in fact, violates basic individual rights protected by the US and Arizona Constitutions.

Twenty years ago, if a state agency like the Arizona Department of Public Safety or a state official like the Governor had suggested that motorists should be video-taped twenty four hours a day, three hundred sixty five days a year, they would have been called “Communists.” Not only was deception used to spread the current system of photo traffic enforcement in Arizona, it is being used to excuse its continued presence in our country.

By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer

May 6, 2010

Arizona is ending a groundbreaking and contentious program that put speed cameras along Phoenix-area freeways and in vans deployed across the state.

Opponents have argued the cameras open the door for wider “Big Brother” surveillance and are more about making money than safety. The program has been the target of an initiative measure proposed for the November ballot.

Even Gov. Jan Brewer has said she doesn’t like the cameras, and her intention to end the program was first disclosed in her January budget proposal. That was followed by a non-renewal letter sent by the Arizona Department of Public Safety this week to the private company that runs the program.

Scottsdale-based Redflex said Thursday that the 36 fixed cameras will be turned off and the 40 vans taken off highways on July 16, the day after its state contract expires.

[. . .]Shawn Dow, a leader of the initiative campaign, welcomed the decision to end the program but said the drive’s organizers still plan to file petition signatures on the July 1 deadline to qualify it for the November ballot.

The end of the state program does not affect local governments’ use of cameras for speed enforcement, but the proposed ballot measure would prohibit state and local governments from using cameras for both speed violations and red-light running.

Initiative : Wording

The Summary:

This initiative measure serves to preserve the balance between the rights of individuals and the need for effective law enforcement. This initiative measure prohibits the issuance or filing of traffic related citations for alleged violations that were detected through the use of photo radar and other photo enforcement equipment. This initiative measure keeps the enforcement of our laws in the hands of trained law enforcement officers who are authorized by the people of Arizona, protects the citizens of Arizona from the abuses that accompany the outsourcing of law enforcement to private, for-profit corporations and ensures that the purpose of law enforcement remains to serve and protect and not to generate revenue for governments.

Dow is now trying to change all that with a ballot initiative this November that would ban all ticket cameras in Arizona.

“I’m tired of being constantly watched,” he said. We’re all being tracked like cattle.”

In 2007, Arizona became the first state in the country to install ticket cameras state-wide, meaning there are cameras on most state highways; there are cameras at many intersections; and there are camera-vans videotaping on side streets.

The owner of any car caught going over the speed limit or running a red light receives a ticket by mail.

“This is all about safety,” says Jay Heiler, an executive at RedFlex, the company that manufacturers most of the state’s ticket cameras. “If you enforce traffic laws you are going to get more compliance with them, and when you get more compliance with traffic laws you get more safety.”

Arizona Citizens AGAINST Photo Radar

Safety. That fancy electronic box with a camera and flash bulb might catch a speeder or red-light runner, but it won’t pull over the speeder or red-light runner that’s drunk/high that heading towards your car at the next intersection. That’s why we have police officers.

Privacy. We don’t believe the role of government is to spy on its citizens, no matter how well intentioned such a program might be. “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither,” said Ben Franklin, and we’re inclined to agree.

Sovereignty. Imagine waking up one morning to see this Australian police car in your rear-view mirror on the Loop 101. Imagine the foreign-born officer walking up to your window and demanding your information from you. Then, imagine your outrage when he has the nerve to write YOU a citation, only to find out that your government has outsourced law enforcement to another nation. Such a scenario isn’t a dystopian future, but rather business-as-usual for the cities and state agencies that rely on Rexflex Group, the “Umbrella Corporation” of traffic control systems. And yes, they’re an Australian company.

Due Process. When a police officer stops you and writes a ticket, he has to verify the person’s identity and make sure he gets his paperwork right in order for the ticket to stand up in court. In addition, you’re personally “served” the complaint by the police officer.With automated enforcement, cities and the state send you a copy of the ticket via mail, and according to their own laws such a mailing is not proper service. They instead hope you’ll incriminate yourself by responding to the complaint. Lets be clear: unless you voluntarily waive your rights and respond to some random solicitation in the mail, the only form of proper service for a photo radar ticket is to be served by a licensed and bonded process server. In fact, the notices sent in the mail usually threaten you into compliance, saying that if you don’t respond, you’ll have to pay for your own service if they choose to hire a process server!

Cronyism. We’re all for free-market capitalism, but by commercializing law enforcement activities and awarding no-bid contracts to such companies, we’re rewarding mediocrity. Today it’s “just” traffic citations, tomorrow it could be Blackwater taking over the functions of the Mesa Police Department. When corporations and governments conspire against the will of the people, rights are lost and freedoms are destroyed.

Just when the Arizona Summer Heat is hitting its peak, the motorists of this state will have a reason to celebrate. On July 1st, 2010 the contract between the Arizona DPS and Redflex Traffic Systems will expire and not be renewed. Redflex broke the news in a Press Release to the Australian Securities Exchange, dated May 6th, 2010.

[. . .]Regardless of the spin put on this story by Redflex or DPS, know that public opinion and the efforts of CameraFRAUD and Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radarplayed a major role in this decision. The work of our volunteers and the voices of our supporters are vital in the effort to ban the scam. In other words, your voice has been heard loud and clear.

We found a way to make 10% of the cameras come down and we won’t stop until the other 90% do as well.

[Phoenix, AZ] May 6th, 2010 – In reaction to the news that the Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) will not renew their contract with Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia, to operate the state-wide freeway photo traffic enforcement system, a press conference will be held outside the Phoenician Resort in Phoenix at 5 p.m today.

The original contract was signed as part of a mandate in the 2008 state budget submitted by then Governor Janet Napolitano, who has since left to become Secretary of Homeland Security. The original intent was to install more than 200 fixed camera locations throughout Arizona freeways as well as deploy mobile units to snap photos of motorists in alleged violation of the speed limit. Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar formed shortly thereafter to protest the proliferation of these cameras citing that the program violated several protections in the Arizona and US Constitutions and had an abhorrent safety record.

The freeway contract ends officially on July 1st. Redflex will be removing the fixed cameras along with their metal housings and the mobile units will no longer be deployed. DPS has said that this move signals a change in direction for the focus of the department.

Recent changes have been proposed to your state reps by Redflex that opens the path towards the automation and privatization of the judicial branch of government.

It’s amazing how much time has passed since a loose-knit group of rookies to politics gathered in early August of 2008 to discuss changes that were coming to our state.

The changes that came were more like a freight train in the night: the barking, stray-dog annoyance of a mere traffic-related topic, “photo radar,” was to turn into nothing less than a rabid pack of electronic vultures: the statewide construction of a surveillance network.

[. . ]And don’t be fooled: your State Representatives and Senators have made a clear, distinct decision to ignore the will of the people by not only permitting Redflex and American Traffic Solutions to continue their theft, but by subsidizing it.

[. . .]It’s become increasingly clear to this writer that the surveillance network of cameras that record video constantly and use automatic license plate recognition to track drivers is only the beginning.

Recent changes have been proposed to your state reps by Redflex that opens the path towards the automation and privatization of the judicial branch of government.

Arizona’s SB1443 and SB1018 allows Redflex to use uniformed police officers to act as private employees for the company’s “notices of violation” to be served. The real punchline to this sick joke that’s being played on our liberty is that the “papers” being served have, at this point, never been filed with an actual court of law.

The first thought that comes to mind is the contradictory nature of photo radar supposedly “freeing up officers” only to have those same officers getting paid overtime to hand deliver papers while wearing the full “color of law.”

…He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance…

The second, and more disturbing outcome of this arrangement is Redflex becoming, in essence, a private, foreign court: able to summon and “detain” a citizen with a hinderance of a neatly printed—and false– violation

[. . .] Simple. Redflex, American Traffic Solutions, IBM, and Xerox all have a vested interest in automating many “tedious” areas of the criminal justice system, and making a killing in the process. Municipal contracts are always seen as lucrative, and courts are no exception. Due process and “proper courtroom procedures” serve no purpose when the party being hindered becomes the state itself.

…He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws…

Arizona politicians have collected $36,265,795 in campaign cash from a tax on speeding tickets since 1999.

A tax levied on speeding tickets funds the re-election efforts of two-thirds of Arizona’s politicians and provides lawmakers with a personal financial incentive to protect controversial photo enforcement programs. In 1999, a ten percent surcharge was imposed on all traffic tickets to create the “Citizens Clean Election Fund.” The fund allows politicians to avoid tedious fundraising efforts.

After raising just $5 each from 220 people in a district, candidates for public office qualify for public financing money to match private expenditures. In effect, these lawmakers collect $16.50 for their campaigns each time a photo radar ticket is issued on an Arizona freeway.

This adds up to big money. In 2008, traffic tickets generated $10,095,771 in revenue for the clean elections fund. Out of this amount, $7,710,739 million was disbursed to lawmakers and candidates during the primary and general elections — an average of $72,063 each. In just the past four months, the new freeway speed camera program has already added another $3.3 million to the total amount collected for lawmakers. Over the past four election cycles, Arizona politicians collected a total of $36,265,795 in campaign cash from the tax on speeding tickets. Opponents of the state photo ticketing program are crying foul.

“Photo radar pays for politicians to get elected,” Shawn Dow, a volunteer for the activist group CameraFraud.com, told TheNewspaper. “Voters want the cameras gone but the politicians want them to stay since it pays for their election. This is the reason that the people believe our government is corrupt.”

Over the past decade, a number of studies have examined the use of red light cameras. The most relevant studies examined the devices in light of changes in traffic and engineering conditions made at intersections during the study period and pulled actual police reports to examine the particular causes of each collision. The following studies are the most comprehensive available:

A 2008 University of South Florida report found:“Comprehensive studies conclude cameras actually increase crashes and injuries, providing a safety argument not to install them…. public policy should avoid conflicts of interest that enhance revenues for government and private interests at the risk of public safety.”Read a summaryFull copy, 80k pdfStudy author responds to criticisms

A 2007 Virginia Department of Transportation study found:“The cameras were associated with an increase in total crashes… The aggregate EB results suggested that this increase was 29%… The cameras were associated with an increase in the frequency of injury crashes… The aggregate EB results suggested an 18% increase, although the point estimates for individual jurisdictions were substantially higher (59%, 79%, or 89% increases) or lower (6% increase or a 5% decrease).”Read a summaryFull copy, 1mb pdfStudy author responds to criticisms

A 2006 Winnipeg, Canada city audit found:“The graph shows an increase of 58% in the number of traffic collisions from 2003 to 2004…. Contrary to long-term expectations, the chart shows an increase in claims at each level of damage with the largest percentage increase appearing at the highest dollar value.”Read a summaryFull copy, 541k pdf

A 2005 Virginia DOT study found:“The cameras are correlated with an increase in total crashes of 8% to 17%.”Read a summaryFull copy, 1.7mb pdf

In 2005, The Washington Post found:“The analysis shows that the number of crashes at locations with cameras more than doubled, from 365 collisions in 1998 to 755 last year. Injury and fatal crashes climbed 81 percent, from 144 such wrecks to 262. Broadside crashes, also known as right-angle or T-bone collisions, rose 30 percent, from 81 to 106 during that time frame.”Read a summaryFull article on the Post website

A 2004 North Carolina A&T University study found:“Our findings are more pessimistic, finding no change in angle accidents and large increases in rear-end crashes and many other types of crashes relative to other intersections.”Read a summaryFull copy, 1.7mb pdf

A 2003 Ontario Ministry of Transportation study found:“Compared to the average number of reported collisions occurring in the before period, the average yearly number of reported collisions increased 15.1 per cent in the after period.”Read a summaryFull copy, 1.5mb pdf

A 1995 Australian Road Research Board study found:“The results of this study suggest that the installation of the RLC at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been increases in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals.”Read a summaryFull copy, 2.4mb pdf

A 1995 Monash University (Australia) study found:“a simple correlation analysis was undertaken for red light running data in the current study and revealed no significant relationship between the frequency of crashes at RLC and non-RLC sites and differences in red light running behaviour.”Read a summary

Related Reports and Studies

The importance of the yellow warning signal time in reducing the instances of red light running is found in the following reports:

A 2004 Texas Transportation Institute study found:“An increase in yellow duration of 1.0 seconds is associated with a [crash frequency] of about 0.6, which corresponds to a 40 percent reduction in crashes.”Read a summaryFull copy, 1.5mb pdf

A 2001 report by the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives found:“The changes in the yellow signal timing regulations have resulted in the inadequate yellow times. And these inadequate yellow times are the likely cause of almost 80 percent of red light entries.”Full version with summary